Written by

It’s great to see the emergence of a well-funded political operation aimed at defeating a misguided and damaging constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Because while those of us who support gay marriage may see it as a moral issue and a civil rights matter, the outcome will be about something else.

Politics.

The referendum’s fate will be determined by strategy, messaging and whether those fighting it can cobble together diverse and perhaps surprising coalitions. Bottom line: It’s going to be a good old-fashioned political street fight. And you win those fights with solid ground games and pulling together people who might disagree on just about everything else.

“The coalition has got to be extensive and broad-based,” longtime Democratic political operative Robin Winston told me Tuesday. “It has to include people in the neighborhoods and every region in the state. This needs to be inclusive of all demographics.”

The new operation is called Freedom Indiana and is headed by Megan Robertson, a Republican political pro with a lengthy list of successful conservative campaigns on her resume. Major corporations are helping to bankroll the effort and an increasingly long list of top political minds on both sides of the aisle are raising their hands to help.

The immediate goal is to convince the Republican-controlled General Assembly to back away from plans to put the issue on the ballot next year. As Aaron Schaler, a top gay-rights activist, put it, “that would save us all a lot of heartache.” Still, the president of the Indiana Stonewall Democrats said he and others understand that the legislature’s leadership has promised to send this issue to the voters.

Bring it on, I say. Call me optimistic but I love the prospect, however uncertain, of a Hoosier electorate shooting down a discriminatory referendum question and sending a message of openness and fatigue with unnecessary political distractions.

But would Indiana voters actually reject the amendment? Count Schaler among those who just two years ago thought such an idea was fantasy but now believe it’s quite possible. He pointed to “anecdotal evidence,” such as a warmer reception to his message at political events, as well as polls showing a sharp turn in favor of gay rights in recent years, a turn that seems certain to grow as today’s young people age and vote more frequently.

(Page 2 of 2)

So how could opponents of the proposed constitutional change win at the polls if the issue arrives there in November of 2014? Well, many factors would determine the outcome, but certain ones could play an outsized role, such as:

* Moderate Republicans. The defeat of Richard Mourdock in last year’s Senate race was powered in part by Republicans in suburban counties who feared their party had veered too far to the right. These voters are likely also sympathetic to the message being delivered by Indiana’s top businesses: that the amendment could harm the economy here by damaging the state’s reputation and its ability to recruit top talent.

Meanwhile, the more libertarian-minded segment of the GOP could be an important ally for opponents. In June, it’s worth noting, the state Libertarian Party issued a statement on the issue, saying government “does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.” Or, as a neighbor at a block party put it this weekend: “I say just live and let live.”

* Younger voter turnout. A recent paper by the Cook Political Report noted the GOP’s “built-in midterm turnout advantage,” as many younger voters sit out midterms and older and more conservative voters make up an even larger slice of the electorate. If that trend continues unabated 2014, the referendum will likely pass.

Polls gauging the broad public mood don’t matter; all that matters is which voters show up on Election Day. Those opposing the amendment must find ways to increase turnout among college students and others in their twenties and thirties, as polls show those voters overwhelming support gay marriage rights. Fortunately, the presence of the marriage amendment on the ballot could help spark that increased turnout among such voters.

* Black voters. A National Journal headline in May labeled African American voters “the last Democratic holdouts on gay marriage.” There’s a good reason for that headline; a Pew survey earlier this year found that only 40 percent of black voters support gay marriage. That’s up from 27 percent a decade earlier, but lags overall support among Democrats by more than 20 points. This highlights the complexity of the battle.

As such, Winston said it is crucial for those fighting the amendment to fill their team with minority voices and leaders. He said gay-rights advocates shouldn’t write off the black vote but rather engage them on the issue of civil rights and fairness.

* Message delivery. Those of us who support gay marriage would likely be well served to narrow the argument as the vote approaches and focus on the question of whether the constitution should be amended to include a marriage ban that is already part of state statute. Why? Because even many opponents of gay marriage oppose the idea of amending the constitution. And because this is about winning an election, focusing on that part of the debate is the smart thing to do.

So what happens if the question is on the ballot 14 months from now? It’s a toss-up at this point. But unlike just a few years ago, this is a fight that can be won.